Domestic cricket is facing the prospect of a civil war after it emerged that the England and Wales Cricket Board is considering legal action against the union that represents the players.

The board is furious over accusations that the chief executive, David Collier, wanted the Professional Cricketers' Association to put pressure on the England captain, Andrew Strauss, and his players to sign a new deal with Stanford during the first Test in Jamaica.

As the fall-out from the ECB's relationship with the Texan – accused of "fraud of shocking magnitude" by the US financial regulators – continues, the under-pressure chairman, Giles Clarke, and Collier will this week try to get on to the front foot.

It is understood they will today consult lawyers about claims in a Sunday newspaper, attributed to a PCA official, that Collier leant on its chief executive, Sean Morris, to increase the pressure on the England players during the Test to sign a revised agreement with Stanford, scrapping the $20m Super Series but agreeing to a new quadrangular tournament at Lord's.

While the ECB has admitted negotiations with Stanford about the revised deal were ongoing up to the week before the Securities and Exchange Commission served him with civil legal papers, Collier was said to be unhappy at the suggestion he encouraged Morris to intervene during the Test, which England went on to lose.

In an email dated 6 February, three days before the first Test was scheduled to finish, he is understood to have said: "I fully appreciate that, unless the Test finishes early, it is likely to be Monday before you are in a position to meet the players."

But Morris said yesterday that in the same email exchange there was a clear sense that Collier was under pressure from Stanford and wanted to move the revised deal along.

Morris, mindful of the fact that the England players were asked to sign the original Stanford deal on the eve of a Test match with New Zealand, said he stood firm and argued for more time. "I understand that David was under pressure to get things done within a certain time-frame and I made it entirely clear that we couldn't meet that time frame," he said.

The ECB will claim that, far from warning against its ongoing involvement with Stanford, the PCA was arguing that he should be held to his original contract.

"The PCA president and chief executive seem to have forgotten that not only were they signed up to Stanford's $20m match but that just this month they gave in principle support to a five-year deal for the quadrangular," said one ECB insider.

"Yet suddenly they seem to be rewriting history. Instead of trying to distance themselves now, they should show real leadership and acknowledge that hindsight is a wonderful thing."